annuarium historiae conciliorum 48 (2016/2017) 440-462 brill.com/anhc What is the Vulgate? Girolamo Seripando’s notes on the Vulgate Dr. Antonio Gerace Fondazione per le Scienze Religiose Giovanni XXIII, Bologna, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven [email protected] Abstract Before the issue of the Insuper decree (1546), by means of which the Council Fathers declared the Vulgate to be the ‘authentic’ Bible for Catholic Church, Girolamo Seri- pando took few notes discussing the need of a threefold Bible, in Latin, Greek and He- brew, as he stressed in the General Congregation on 3 April 1546. Only Rongy (1927/28), Jedin (1937) and François/Gerace (2018) paid attention to this document, preserved at the National Library in Naples in a manuscript of the 17th century (Ms. Vind. Lat. 66, 123v–127v). In this article, the author offers the very first transcription of these notes together with the analysis of Seripando’s sources, providing a new primary source to early modern historians. Keywords Girolamo Seripando – Vulgate – Council of Trent – John Driedo – San Giovanni a Carbonara Library 1 Introduction The aim of this article is to offer the very first transcription of Girolamo Seri- pando (1493–1563)’s unedited notes titled De Libris Sanctis, the only copy of 1 1 I thank a lot Prof. Dr. Violet Soen (ku Leuven) and Prof. Dr. Brad Gregory (University of Notre Dame), who helped me to date the manuscript that contains Seripando’s De Libris Sanctis. Moreover, thanks go to Ms Eliza Halling, who carefully checked the English of this article. © verlag ferdinand schöningh, 2019 | doi:10.30965/25890433-04802007Downloaded from Brill.com09/23/2021 08:27:36PM via free access <UN> What is the Vulgate? Girolamo Seripando’s notes on the Vulgate 441 which is contained in a 17th century manuscript,1 still preserved in Naples at the National Library (Ms. Vind. Lat. 66, 123v–127v). This document has never been included in the “Concilium Tridentinum: Diariorum, actorum, epistola- rum, tractatuum nova collection” nor in other editions of the acts of the Coun- cil of Trent. As I will demonstrate, the Superior General of the Augustinians wrote his preparatory document on the basis of John Driedo’s De ecclesiasticis Scripturis et dogmatibus (1533),2 in order to explain his own viewpoint con- cerning the Hebrew Bible and Greek Septuagint, which Seripando considered as a useful means to better comprehend the Latin Vulgate. Seripando wrote his notes during the deliberations leading up to the Fourth Session of the Council of Trent (8 April 1546), when the Council fathers dis- cussed the ‘authentic’ version of the Scriptures. As is widely known, the Vulgate was eventually chosen to be used in the Catholic Church as official edition, with no reference to the Greek and Hebrew versions (nor to the ver- nacular translations). However, as I will show, Seripando asked himself what is the Vulgate? This problematic question will lead to a brief introduction to the approach that the early modern scholars took towards the Vulgate’s reliability. Further attention will be paid to Seripando, as well as the influence that the Louvain theologian Driedo had on him while writing his notes, which were precisely handed down in the above-mentioned document, to be used before the Council in Trent, prior to the Fourth Session. Seripando’s De Libris Sanc­ tis will therefore be analysed, closely followed by an analysis of Seripando’s reasoning, whilst considering it in light of the authoritative sources he turned to in order to enforce his own argument, viz. to have a threefold Bible, viz. in Latin, Greek and Hebrew. After this careful analysis, the transcription of Seripando’s unedited document will follow, providing an important primary source for historians of the early modern Catholic Church. 2 What is the Vulgate? It was difficult to answer this question until Clement viii published the Sixto- Clementine Vulgate in 1592, the amended edition of which had been required almost half a century earlier by the Council fathers in the Fourth Session of the Council of Trent, when they issued the decree Insuper on 8 April 1546: More­ over, the same holy Council … decides and declares that the old well known Latin Vulgate edition which has been tested in the Church by long use over so many 2 I thank a lot also the Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (FWO) that granted me a research stay in Naples and Rome to work on this article. 2 Johannes Driedo, De ecclesiasticis Sripturis et dogmatibus, Louvain 1533. annuarium historiae conciliorum 48 (2016/2017) 440-462Downloaded from Brill.com09/23/2021 08:27:36PM via free access <UN> 442 Gerace centuries should be kept as the authentic text in public readings, debates, ser­ mons and explanations; and no one is to dare or presume on any pretext to reject it … [Hence] the Council decrees and determines that thereafter the sacred Scrip­ tures, particularly this ancient Vulgate edition, shall be printed after a thorough revision.3 Indeed, over the centuries, several readings (lectiones) of the Vulgate had been handed down, oftentimes with significant variations between them, due either to the ignorance of the copyists; simple scribal or typographical mistakes; or even to deliberate ‘corrections’ by scholars. Both the Church authorities and the biblical humanists were aware of these inconsistencies and thus tried to recover the pristine integrity of the Bible, after a thorough philological study. Among these biblical humanists was Lorenzo Valla (1407–1457), who wrote his Adnotationes to the New Testament, which was later edited by Erasmus (1466–1536) in 1504. In Valla’s line, the Dutch humanist mistrusted the Vulgate New Testament, and published a new Latin translation of it in 1516, the Novum Instrumentum, with the opposing Greek ‘original’ as a kind of control text.4 Af- ter Erasmus, Sante Pagnini (1470–1541) translated the Scriptures from Hebrew to Latin in 1527, a clear evidence that he considered the Vulgate untrustworthy, since he felt the need for a new translation from the ‘original’ source.5 Other scholars were also unconvinced by the trustworthiness of the Vulgate, among whom was Robert Estienne (1503–1559), who made use of both Greek and He- 3 4 5 brew6 sources to amend the Bible.6 Another scholar who was similarly skeptical 3 N. P. Tanner/G. Alberigo (eds.), Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Washington, 1990, vol. 2, 664–665. Here the Latin text Insuper eadem sacrosancta Synodus … statuit et declarat, ut haec ipsa vetus et vulgata editio, quae longo tot saeculorum usu in ipsa ecclesia probata est, in publicis lectionibus, disputationibus, praedicationibus et expositionibus pro authentica ha­ beatur, et quod [= ut] nemo illam reiicere quovis praetextu audeat vel praesumat … decernit et statuit, ut posthac sacra scriptura, potissimum vero haec ipsa vetus et vulgata editio quam emendatissime imprimatur, Sessio quarta. Decretum secundum: Recipitur vulgata editio Bib- liae praescribiturque modus interpretandi sacram scripturam etc., in: Concilium Tridenti- num: Diariorum, actorum, epistularum, tractatuum nova collectio, Freiburg i. B., 1901–2001 (= CT) vol. 5, 91, 1–35 – 92, 1–3 and 92 1–17. 4 On Erasmus’ New Testament, see amongst others B. M. Metzger/B.D. Ehrman, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration, Oxford 2005, 143–145. J. K. Elliott, Novum Testamentum editum est: The Five-Hundredth Anniversary of Erasmus’s New Testament, in: The BiTr 67 (2016) 9–28; A. Brown, The Manuscript Sources and Textual Char- acter of Erasmus’ 1516 Greek New Testament, in M. Wallraff/S. Seidel Menchi/K. von Greyer (eds.), Basel 1516: Erasmus’ Editio of the New Testament, Tübingen 2016, 125–144. W. W. Combs, ‘Erasmus and the textus receptus’, in: Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 1 (1996) 35–53. 5 Veteris et Novi Testamenti nova translatio, Lyon 1527. 6 On Robert Estienne, see for instance E. Aarmstrong, Robert Estienne, Royal Printer, Cambridge 1986. annuarium historiae conciliorumDownloaded 48 (2016/2017) from Brill.com09/23/2021 440-462 08:27:36PM via free access <UN> What is the Vulgate? Girolamo Seripando’s notes on the Vulgate 443 was the Spanish orientalist Arias Montanus (1527–1598), who believed that the Vulgate was an absolutely unreliable source, as it was merely handed down through the ages.7 The humanist-minded opposition to (what was claimed to be) Jerome’s translation was however countered by ‘traditionalist’ theologians, who asserted the importance of the Vulgate, given its history and its authorita- tive position over the other Bible editions within the Latin Church. The latter opinion was subsequently adopted by the Council of Trent. Actually the decree Insuper proclaimed the Latin Vulgate as the authentic version of the Catho- lic Church, because of its conformity with the Evangelical truth and its more than one-thousand year tradition in the Western Church, being used in public readings, debates, sermons and explanations, even though it must be printed emendatissime. The Vulgate was indeed the version of the Sacred Scriptures used to define the doctrine and the (liturgical) practice of the Catholic Church, dating from at least the first Lateran Council (18 March – 11 April 1123). Up to the fourth Council of Constantinople (5 October 869 – 28 February 870), Greek was the language used in the Ecumenical Councils, and the Greek Septuagint the version of the Bible upon which dogmas were based. But again the ques- tion arises, what is the Vulgate? This is essentially what Girolamo Seripando, who became Cardinal in February 1561, repeatedly asked Cardinal Marco Anto- nio da Mula, known as ‘Amulio’ (1506–1572) in October 1561, fifteen years after Trent’s definition. Seripando says: This Council declared in other occasions that in reading, in preaching and in discussing, no other translation than the Vulgate is to be used.